Date: Tue, 19 Jul 1994 23:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Richard Isaac
The following are excerpts from the editorial pages of three Puget Sound
papers. One positive, two negative. Ill assume I don't have to repeat
the Bigot Busters denials of the ridiculous charges, especially those in
the third article. I encourage those of you in the area to express your
positive and negative opinions on the matter of Bigot Bustes and possible
legislation to the papers involved (and the Tacoma News-Tribune, the
Seattle Times and P-I) and Secretary of State Ralph Munro. Thank you.
* Richard Isaac
__*_*___
\* * / Seattle
*\ *
***\**/** rmisaac
\/ @eskimo.com
`````````````````````````````````
Journal-American (Bellevue, WA), July 18, 1994
EDITORIAL
INITIATIVE BACKERS NEED TO PROVE CASE
If the proponents of two anti-gay-rights initiatives want to halt
harassment of their petition drives, they're going to have to prove that
real harassment is actually taking place. So far, they haven't done that.
Initiative backers, till licking their wounds from the failure of I-608
and I-610 to make this fall's ballot, took their complaints this week to
Secretary of State Ralph Munro. They say members of groups like Bigot
Busters, an anti-initiative organization, pushed, shouted at, and spat
upon signature gatherers as they passed out petitions.
Bigot Busters, for their part, claims that their efforts were virtually
passive. They say they simply offered information revealing the
initiatives for what they probably were: an effort to legalize blatantly
unconstitutional discrimination.
Without proof either way, it's impossible to tell who's telling the
truth. So far, the petition backers have failed to provide one scintilla
of hard evidence that there is real harassment occurring.
If the anti-initiative effort is in fact peaceful, then organizers have
every right to continue to express their views and offer counter-
information. That's the way the First Amendment works.
But if they're stepping over the line, then they should be stopped under
current anti-harassment laws. They have no more right to be abusive
than, say, anti-abortion activists have the right to similar activities
at abortion clinics.
I-608 backers want Munro to crack down on the effort. They want to ask
for new laws that would prevent such anti-initiative activity.
That's unnecessary. There already are anti-harassment laws on the books
that should fully protect signature gatherers. New laws, including one
proposal to include anti-initiative efforts under racketeering laws,
amount to special rights for some at the expense of others.
And isn't that what the petition backers say they're against?
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Olympian (Olympia, WA), July 14, 1994
EDITORIAL
LAWMAKERS MUST ACT
It's time for the state lawmakers to take a hard look at laws governing
Washington's initiative process.
...
I-608 supporters said their signature collectors were harassed and
intimidated by gay-rights supporters rallying under a "Bigot Busters"
banner.
Gay-right advocates denied the allegations saying they only sought to
educate initiative signers.
Secretary of State Ralph Munro, the elected official in charge of
elections at the state level, has promised an investigation into the
allegations of intimidation.
...
...the other, equally troubling issue is whether people can use
harassment and intimidation to defeat initiatives. That's where the
Legislature must act.
Munro likely will propose that lawmakers establish a "perimeter" around
signature solicitors to protect them from intimidation.
Given the climate on the streets, Munro's proposal makes sense.
...
the courts and the Legislature can, and must, lead the way to change [of
the initiative process].
``````````````````````````````
Herald (Everett, WA), July 18, 1994
OPINION
GAY RIGHTS DEBATE IS TOO IMPORTANT TO BE LEFT TO FRINGES
by Peter Callaghan, State Political Columnist, Tacoma News Tribune.
Those who brought us initiatives 608 and 610 -- known collectively as the
anti-gay rights initiatives -- promise to be back next year for another
try at making the ballot.
The people who take credit for stopping the initiatives this year -- the
self-proclaimed Bigot Busters --promise to be back as well. The first
reaction to such news: Oh joy. The second: Thanks for the warning.
These folks deserve each other. We all deserve better.
[continues, objecting to job and housing discrimination, concerned about
affirmative action and govt. set-asides for homosexuals, and acceptance
of "all aspects of the so-called gay lifestyle." Suggests "compromise":
employment and housing protection and banning affirmative action programs
and "state sanction or approval [of] homosexuality."]
Unfortunately, the debate isn't being led by reasonable or rational
people, at least not in the initiative campaigns. The debate has been
captured and held for ransom by those on the extremes. For example, we
had two initiatives circulating this spring under the guise of "equal
rights, not special rights." In fact, both initiatives --based on a
belief that homosexuals are made, not born --would have assigned them
second-class citizenry.
[continues, describing the effects of 608 and 610: banning minority
status, claims of discrimination, etc.; teaching that homosexuality is
positive, healthy or appropriate in the schools; taking children away from
gay parents in case of divorce.]
Had these measures reached the ballot, their chances of passing were iffy
at best. While many citizens might agree with parts, the cumulative tone
of fear and unfairness would have placed a heavy burden on proponents.
That, however, did not stop a group known as Bigot Busters from launching
their own pre-emptive strike -- a distasteful campaign against the
signature gathering.
Interference, intimidation, and harassment were the techniques for
discouraging citizens from reading and signing the initiatives. Anyone
with concerns about the issue was immediately labeled a homophobe, a
hatemonger, a fascist. This gang of street toughs has been praised by
liberals and much of the news media. They should be condemned.
Bigot Busters is just as responsible for polarizing the issue as are the
initiative sponsors. Both sides are so shrill -- and their tactics so
distasteful -- that many Americans simply want to avoid the issue. That's
unfortunate. It's too important to be left to the extremists.
Somewhere there are rational statesmen -- gay and straight, conservative
and liberal -- who can put together a solution that pleases no one but
satisfies the majority of Americans. If only they'd get the chance.